Saving Seafood

Bipartisan Shark Trade Bill Will Improve Global Shark Conservation and Protect Sustainable U.S. Fisheries

March 15, 2018 – WASHINGTON – The following was released by the Sustainable Shark Alliance:

A new bipartisan bill introduced today in the U.S. House of Representatives supported by conservation groups, zoos, aquariums and industry advances global shark conservation by ensuring that all shark products imported into the United States meet the same high ethical and sustainability standards required of American fishermen.

The Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act of 2018, H.R. 5248, sponsored by Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL), Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Darren Soto (D-FL), and Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), would create a formal and transparent certification program for countries seeking to import shark products into the United States. Foreign nations would be required to receive certification from the U.S. Secretary of Commerce confirming that they have an effective prohibition on the reprehensible and wasteful practice of shark finning, and have shark management policies comparable to those under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Unlike legislation (H.R. 1456/S.793) from Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) ostensibly designed to improve global shark conservation by banning all trade of shark fins in the United States, the Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act would not punish American fishermen for bad actors in other parts of the world. Instead, it would leverage access to U.S. markets to incentivize other countries to eliminate shark finning and overfishing in their fisheries.

“Fishing is a long-standing profession and treasured American pastime,” said Rep. Webster. “Our responsibility is to balance the needs of the industry with conservation. This bill recognizes the sacrifices American fishermen have made to rebuild and sustain our shark populations. It encourages other nations wishing to export shark products to the United States to adhere to the same high standards for conservation and management.”

“We’d like to thank the Congressmen for introducing the Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act, which represents a better way forward for shark conservation,” said Bob Jones, executive director of the Southeastern Fisheries Association in Tallahassee, Florida. “This legislation goes a long way toward protecting U.S. fishing jobs and combatting the threats facing global shark stocks by promoting the successful model of American shark management.”

Our U.S. shark fisheries are among the best managed in the world. In a paper published last year, Dr. Robert Shiffman, a Liber Ero Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Simon Fraser University, and Dr. Robert Hueter, Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory, wrote that the U.S. “has some of the most sustainable shark fisheries on Earth” and called the U.S. “a model of successful management.” Shark finning, the cruel practice of removing a shark’s fins at sea and discarding the rest of the shark, has been banned in the United States with industry support since the 1990s.

The Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act is supported by commercial fishing industry groups, including but not limited to the following members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities: the Garden State Seafood Association, Southeastern Fisheries Association, North Carolina Fisheries Association, and Directed Sustainable Fisheries. It is also supported by the Louisiana Shrimp Association; environmental groups, such as the Wildlife Conservation Society; and zoo and aquarium facilities, such as Mote Marine Laboratory, Palm Beach Zoo, SeaWorld, Zoo Miami Foundation and the Florida Aquarium. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission also wrote a letter in support of this legislation.

About the Sustainable Shark Alliance
The Sustainable Shark Alliance (SSA) is a coalition of shark fishermen and seafood dealers that advocates for sustainable U.S. shark fisheries and supports healthy shark populations. The SSA stands behind U.S. shark fisheries as global leaders in successful shark management and conservation. The SSA is a member of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

 

Independent Adjudicator Finds No Shark Finning Issue in PNA Tuna Fishery

March 2, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Following concerns brought up by the International Pole and Line Foundation, an Independent Adjudicator has confirmed that the PNA skipjack tuna fishery “continues to meet the Marine Stewardship Council’s (MSC) standard for sustainable fishing.

Although the International Pole and Line Foundation raised a “number of concerns,” one of the bigger issues revolved around the group’s claim that the PNA skipjack tuna fishery is involved in shark finning. MSC had banned the practice of shark finning in 2013, and a ban was also put in place by the PNA governments. According to the MSC, shark finning now only occurs in “isolated cases.” The Independent Adjudicator dismissed the claims of shark finning in the fishery, saying that it is “unrealistic” to make a fishery ineligible for certification based on a single incident. An auditor has recommended that the PNA continue to prosecute shark finning offenders and maintain enforcement actions.

“This highlights the strength of the MSC process,” MSC Science and Standards Director Dr. David Agnew said in a press release. “As a result of this objection, more information is now in the public domain about the PNA fishery, adding to the information in the published assessment report, and improving the transparency of the fishery’s management. This confirms that the PNA skipjack tuna fishery is a sustainable and well-managed fishery that has made considerable improvements over the course of its first MSC certificate. People buying MSC labelled PNA tuna can be confident that their purchase is making a positive difference to the sustainability of our oceans.”

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

 

Federal bill that could eliminate shark fin sales puts pressure on N.C. shark fishermen

November 6, 2017 — WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, N.C. — The sale of shark fins may soon become illegal for coastal fisherman across the country. Legislation has been introduced to the House and Senate which would make it illegal to possess, buy, sell, or transport shark fins or any product containing shark fins.

Local fishermen make a portion of their income based off of the sale of shark fins and shark meat. Some perceive this aspect of their business to be at risk because of the potential regulation.

Shark fins, not shark finning 

Shark finning is the process of cutting the fin off of a live shark and discarding the remainder of the fish back into the ocean.

The practice was made illegal in the United States in 2000, with a loophole that was closed by 2009.

All shark species, with the exception of the smooth dogfish, are federally protected from finning under current legislation.

The sale of shark fins is legal in North Carolina. Fishermen are permitted to harvest and sell the fins of sharks once landed, not while the shark is still alive and at sea. This distinction is important to fishermen who oppose the inhumane act of shark finning.

“People are obviously horrified by the thought, and they should be,” said Jerry Schill, director of government relations for the North Carolina Fisheries Association.

Read the full story at the Port City Daily 

 

Misplaced NOAA footnote blamed for shark fin miscue

October 27, 2017 — US senator Cory Booker and others have been exaggerating the number of shark fin incidents in efforts to get legislation passed that would ban the practice, but it’s really a misplaced footnote that’s to blame, a fishing industry trade group says.

Booker, who has been suggested as a future possible presidential candidate, reported at a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, & Coast Guard, in early August, that he was “shocked to find out that, since 2010, [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)] has investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark fining.”

But the New Jersey Democrat is wrong, according to a press release issued by Saving Seafood on Thursday, bringing the matter to light.

“While the information NOAA provided in response to senator Booker’s staff was not entirely inaccurate, a footnote was attached to the wrong sentence, making it possible for a reader to misinterpret the over-inclusive information provided,” the group said.“So, in the past 7.5 years, with an annual average of 2.6 million pounds landed sustainably from federally managed shark fisheries, there has been on average just 3.5 incidents per year resulting in charges,” Saving Seafood said.

“Shark finning is a reprehensible activity that has been outlawed in the U.S. and is opposed by participants in the sustainable U.S. shark fishery,” said Robert Vanasse, executive director of the group. “Members of our coalition do not believe there is any need for Booker’s bill.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

 

Agency gave bad data to senator trying to stop shark finning

October 27, 2017 — A federal agency said on Thursday that it made a mistake with a key piece of data it gave to U.S. Sen. Cory Booker as he was building a case to shut down America’s shark fin trade.

Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, has cited more than 500 incidents involving complaints of shark finning in the U.S., dating back to January 2010, as cause to support shutting down the trade. But the number is actually 85.

Booker reached out to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration months ago to find out how often it investigates allegations of shark finning, an illegal practice in which a shark’s fins are removed and the shark is dumped back into the water, sometimes while it’s still alive.

An NOAA worker’s error involving a new case management system caused the mistake in the number of finning incident reports, said Casey Brennan, chief of staff for the NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement. He said the number of reports that led to charges was 26.

Saving Seafood, a fishing industry trade group, asked the NOAA to clarify the figures about shark finning incidents after seeing conflicting data on the agency’s website.

“Shark finning is a reprehensible activity that has been outlawed in the U.S. and is opposed by participants in the sustainable U.S. shark fishery,” said Robert Vanasse, executive director of the group. “Members of our coalition do not believe there is any need for Booker’s bill.”

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Washington Post

Footnote Error Leads to Dramatically Inflated Claims of Illegal Shark Finning from Sen. Booker, Oceana

October 26, 2017 (Saving Seafood) — The horrific practice of shark finning has been illegal in U.S. waters since 2000, and is vehemently opposed by all U.S. shark fisheries and participants in those fisheries. The Office of Law Enforcement at NOAA Fisheries is enforcing the current finning prohibition; US fishermen are in full compliance with the law.  There are very few incidents of this terrible practice on record in the United States.

On August 1, 2017, U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) chaired a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, & Coast Guard regarding the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).  During the hearing, Senator Cory Booker (D-New Jersey) asked Chris Oliver, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries and head of the National Marine Fisheries Service, to keep him informed on NOAA investigations of shark finning allegations. Sen. Booker introduced a bill earlier this year designed to prevent people from possessing or selling shark fins in America.

Leading up to his question, Senator Booker stated the following. “You know that shark finning was first outlawed in U.S. waters in 2000. And a loophole in that original law was closed by the Shark Conservation Act of 2009. I recently asked your office how many shark-finning investigations NOAA has opened since January 1, 2010. I was shocked to find out that since 2010, NOAA has investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark finning. As of April, there were seven shark finning cases that were open but not yet charged.”

Sen. Booker’s statement, that NOAA advised him of over 500 instances of alleged shark finning immediately sparked incredulity in the commercial fishing industry, because in June 2016, in an article by Ally Rogers, a communications specialist for NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement (OLE), entitled OLE Working Hard To Identify, Prevent Incidents of Shark Finning, Illegal Shark Fishing, NOAA stated that during the ten year period from 2006-2016, 40% of the “nearly 80 shark-related incidents” referred to “fins that were not naturally attached to the shark carcasses.”  That works out to fewer than 32 incidents involving shark fins in a decade, or on average no more than 3.16 per year.

Saving Seafood asked NOAA how it could be that the agency told Senator Booker that they had “investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark finning” in the past 7.5 years.

While the information NOAA provided in response to Senator Booker’s staff was not entirely inaccurate, a footnote was attached to the wrong sentence, making it possible for a reader to misinterpret the over-inclusive information provided.

In the NOAA case management system, there were 526 reports that contained the word “shark” in some form or another.  This could include a number of legal and illegal activities including inspections, boardings, a legal or illegal take of a shark, by-catch, harvesting sharks during a closed season, and unpermitted shark fishing activities, to name a few.  Any report that came into NOAA with the word “shark” in it, would have appeared as an incident in the numbers provided to Senator Booker.

In fact, of those 526 reports, only 85 were incidents that referred to “shark fins” or “shark finning”.  Of those 85 incidents, only 26 resulted in charges that could be a criminal complaint, a summary settlement, a written warning, or a Notice of Violation and Assessment (NOVA).  So, in the past 7.5 years, with an annual average of 2.6 million pounds landed sustainably from Federally managed shark fisheries, there has been on average just 3.5 incidents per year resulting in charges. And that is consistent with the earlier data.

In 2016, just ahead of the Discovery Channel’s “Shark Week,” Senator Booker, and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-California) joined with actor Morgan Freeman and the environmental group Oceana to introduce the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act (S. 793/H.R. 1456, in the current Congress).  The ban is opposed by leading shark scientists David Shiffman of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia and Robert Hueter, Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Florida.  Delegate Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (I- Northern Mariana Islands), and Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-West Virginia) are also original co-sponsors.

Oceana, the Humane Society International, Wild Aid, and COARE have used the inaccurate information in support of the shark fin ban, erroneously arguing that even “in U.S. waters, our anti-finning law does not effectively stop shark finning.”  In a recent blog post, Lora Snyder, Campaign Director at Oceana, Iris Ho, Wildlife Program Manager at Humane Society International, Peter Knights, Executive Director at WildAid and Christopher Chin, Executive Director at COARE, reference “government records cited during recent Congressional testimony” to make the claim that “more than 500 alleged shark finning incidents… have taken place in U.S. waters since January 2010.”  They go on to extrapolate from that number, stating “That is approximately five cases every month.”

In fact, over the past decade, there have been fewer than four incidents per year.

Oceana hired The McGrath Group, headed by six-term former Congressman and President of the National Republican Club Ray McGrath to lobby for the bills, spending $20,000 with the GOP firm between July 1 and Sept 31 this year.

Could a Shark Fin Ban Actually Be Bad for Sharks?

Two scientists have argued that the United States’ proposed shark fin ban may not have the intended benefits.

September 26, 2017 — At first blush, a proposed national ban on shark fins in the United States would seem like a good thing for sharks. Shark fishing has been blamed for the decline in a number of shark species, and specifically fins, which typically find their way into shark fin soup, create their own problems. Since the fin is the most valuable part of a shark, some fisherman use a practice called “finning”—already banned in the U.S.—where the fins are removed from the shark (sometimes while still alive) and then the rest of the animal is disposed of. Banning the fins all together sounds like a simple way to end all these issues once and for all. However, in a paper published this month in the journal Marine Policy, marine scientists David Shiffman and Robert Hueter present a different argument: such a ban actually “would undermine sustainable shark fisheries.”

According to the office of New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, over 100 scientists have come out in support of the bill he introduced this past March seeking to ban shark fins. But of course, there are two sides to every story, and according to the Associated Press, Shiffman and Hueter essentially state that when it comes to shark fishing, America is one of the few places that actually practices sustainability, so why mess it?

“Removing that from the marketplace removes a template of a well-managed fishery,” Shiffman told the AP. “It’s much easier for us to say, here’s a way you can do this.” His paper also suggests that since the U.S. is such a small part of the worldwide shark fin trade, a ban in the U.S. would simply be made up for by more fishing elsewhere.

Read the full story at Food & Wine

A US ban on shark fins is a bad idea, say researchers

September 22, 2017 — Earlier this year, United States senators put forth S.793, a bill they’ve named the “Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act”. With the noble goal of protecting shark populations, which are in decline all over the globe, the document proposes a total ban on the buying or selling of shark fins in the US. Sounds like an unambiguously good thing, right? Well, the straightforward answer to a problem is not always the best one – and some shark researchers worry that this approach could do more harm than good.

In a recently published paper, shark researchers David Shiffman and Robert Hueter argue that banning trade in fins would not prevent many shark deaths at all – but it might hinder successful conservation practices, and sow confusion by misrepresenting the true threats to these animals. What they recommend instead is prioritising the continued sustainable management of shark fishing.

The finning issue

Let’s start with the broad problem: sharks are in trouble. And losing them is a threat not only for the ecosystems in which they serve important roles, but also for economies all over the globe that rely on them for food, including the United States. Worldwide, many populations are dwindling, their decline driven largely by overfishing, including hunting for meat, bycatch, as well as the lucrative fin trade, which supplies demand in some countries for a delicacy known as shark-fin soup.

This fin trade has led to a phenomenon called shark finning. As the bill describes, “Shark finning is the cruel practice in which the fins of a shark are cut off on board a fishing vessel at sea. The remainder of the animal is then thrown back into the water to drown, starve, or die a slow death.” This practice is not only cruel, but also wasteful – in contrast with conservative shark-fishing practices that make use of meat and parts from the entire body.

Shark finning has actually been banned in the US since the 1990s, but as long as the animal’s body is not discarded at sea, fishers are generally free to do what they will with the fins; indeed, these are typically harvested along with the meat. The new bill, however, presented by Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, proposes a total ban on possessing, transporting, selling or purchasing shark fins, under threat of a fine of up to $100,000 or more.

Read the full story at Earth Touch News

Shark Fin Ban Is Misguided, Would Undermine Sustainable U.S. Shark Fisheries, Say Experts

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – September 14, 2017 – A ban on shark fin sales in the United States would undermine some of the planet’s most sustainable shark fisheries while harming global shark conservation efforts, according to two prominent shark scientists.

In a paper published this month in Marine Policy, Dr. David Shiffman, a Liber Ero Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, B.C., and Dr. Robert Hueter, Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Fla., call proposed Congressional legislation banning the sale or purchase of shark fins in the United States “misguided.” Environmental group Oceana is pushing the legislation, known as the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act.

In an interview with Saving Seafood, Dr. Shiffman said the legislation was “well-intentioned” but “overly simplistic.” By withdrawing from the global shark fin market, the United States would remove incentives for its trading partners to build sustainable shark fisheries, and would eliminate an important example of sustainable shark fisheries management, he said.

“We’re a relatively small percentage of the overall trade in shark fins, so banning the trade of shark fins within the U.S. will not have that much of a direct impact on shark mortality,” Dr. Shiffman told Saving Seafood. “But we’re a really high percentage of the sustainably caught, well-managed shark fishery. So removing us from the global marketplace for fins doesn’t help save that many sharks, but it removes this sustainable fishery from the marketplace as a template that can be copied.”

According to Dr. Shiffman, U.S. shark fisheries are built on a strong mix of “scientific research infrastructure” and “management and enforcement infrastructure,” which has helped make them some of the most sustainable in the world. His coauthor, Dr. Hueter, told Saving Seafood that enacting a shark fin ban would undermine decades of progress that went into building those sustainable fisheries.

“We have done a great job working together to rebuild the fish, and at least make the fisheries sustainable and profitable,” Dr. Hueter said. “And that is why this fin ban, in our opinion, is so misguided. Because after all these decades of work to get us to a great point with a bright future, this sort of ban would just cut the legs out from underneath the fishery. It would cause waste, put people out of business who are doing things right, and reward the folks in other nations who are not doing things well.”

Much of the public remains unaware of the sustainable status of most U.S. shark fisheries, a phenomenon the authors attribute to confusion over key issues related to shark conservation. In particular, many do not understand the difference between “shark finning” – the inhumane and illegal practice of removing a shark’s fins at sea – and sustainable landings of whole sharks required by U.S. law. Finning is “just this boogeyman of shark conservation activists,” Dr. Shiffman said. “People don’t understand what shark finning means in many cases.”

“We have sounded the alarm now for 20 years or more about this thing called finning to the point where we’ve gotten people so upset about it that they no longer listen to the subtle difference between finning and fishing,” Dr. Hueter said. “And they think that all sharks that are caught by commercial fishermen are finned animals.”

Should a total fin ban be enacted, rule-following U.S. fishermen would be economically harmed, the authors write in their paper, noting that nearly a quarter of the total value of shark meat sales comes from shark fins. Forcing fishermen to throw out fins from sustainably caught sharks would be wasteful, contradicting a United Nations plan of action to create “full use” in global shark fisheries, they write.

Instead of a fin ban, Dr. Shiffman and Dr. Hueter support policies focused on sustainable shark fisheries management. Dr. Hueter recommended five ways fishery managers could pursue this goal: increase penalties for those caught finning sharks, which Florida did earlier this year; stop imports of shark products from countries that don’t practice sustainable shark fishing; incentivize the domestic industry to process shark fins within the U.S. and provide for the domestic demand; closely monitor U.S. shark populations and support strict measures for sustainability; and increase public education about the problems facing global shark populations.

“Banning is always the easiest thing,” Dr. Hueter said. “Making the fishery so it’s regulated and sustainable and smart, that’s hard. But we shouldn’t be choosing things based on what sounds good or what feels good. We should be doing things based on what works.”

There is broad support in the scientific community for sustainable shark fisheries. In a recent survey of over 100 members of scientific research societies focusing on sharks and rays, Dr. Shiffman and Dr. Neil Hammerschlag, a marine ecologist at the University of Miami, found that 90 percent preferred sustainable management to a total ban on the sale of shark products. Dr. Shiffman believes that sustainable fisheries can go hand in hand with shark conservation.

“I am glad to see that the best available data, over and over again, is showing that we can have healthy shark populations while still having sustainable, well-managed fisheries that employ fishermen and provide protein to the global marketplace,” said Dr. Shiffman, who also writes for the marine science blog Southern Fried Science and frequently comments on shark conservation issues on Twitter. “We don’t need to choose between the environment and jobs in this case if we do it correctly.”

Federal Scientists, Fishermen Question Shark Fin Ban

July 27, 2017 — The following is an excerpt from a report, by Jim Strickland of WSB-TV in Atlanta, about a new bill, co-sponsored by Georgia Congressmen David Scott and Buddy Carter, that would outlaw the sale of all shark fins, including legally caught ones, in the United States:

The new bill, which would create the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act, has stirred a fight over whether dealing in shark fins should be made illegal.

Videos of “finning,” where foreign fishing fleets cut the fins off live sharks then throw the fish back to slowly die, pepper YouTube.

“You shouldn’t do it and that’s all there is to it. Not to mention it’s cruel,” said licensed Georgia shark fisherman Charlie Phillips. As vice chair of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Phillips advises the government on seafood policy.

Finning live sharks has been outlawed in the U.S. since 2000. Here, fins must be harvested on land, after the fish is caught and killed at sea. Violators risk fines and banishment from the industry.

“I don’t let anyone do anything illegal on my boat,” said commercial shark fisherman Dave Campo.

“They’re impacting the American fisherman for what may be happening in other places, that we’ll never control,” Campo said.

It’s not just the fishermen saying so. So does the director of the nation’s official shark research lab, Dr. Bob Hueter of Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota.

“They’ll have to throw the fins in the dumpsters which is wasteful and it doesn’t make any sense for the fishery,” Dr. Hueter said.

According to Dr. Hueter, a ban will wipe out responsible shark fishing here, while countries that still allow live finning will fill the void.

“By doing this we’re essentially punishing the wrong people,” Dr. Hueter told Strickland.

Read and watch the full story at WSB-TV